Bad Movie Logo
"A website to the detriment of good film"
Custom Search
HOMEB-MOVIE REVIEWSREADER REVIEWSFORUMINTERVIEWSUPDATESABOUT
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
October 18, 2017, 08:09:09 AM
585442 Posts in 45115 Topics by 5970 Members
Latest Member: 7Hz
Badmovies.org Forum  |  Other Topics  |  Television  |  Broadchurch: the American Remix Version « previous next »
Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5]
Author Topic: Broadchurch: the American Remix Version  (Read 15513 times)
BoyScoutKevin
Frightening Fanatic of Horrible Cinema
****

Karma: 217
Posts: 4088


« Reply #60 on: March 18, 2015, 12:09:58 PM »

Continuing . . .

21. FAILURE to take police backup along when confronting murderer.

22. FAILURE to prevent victim's father from confronting his son's murderer, especially with no police around during the confrontation.

23. When murder is by strangulation, FAILURE to bag victim's hands to prevent contamination of any possible trace evidence that is there from murderer.

24. And FAILURE to properly investigate previous police misconduct by hero.

Next time: some final thoughts and "Tabula Rasa"
Logged
BoyScoutKevin
Frightening Fanatic of Horrible Cinema
****

Karma: 217
Posts: 4088


« Reply #61 on: March 26, 2015, 03:09:43 PM »

It's been an year and a half, almost, since we took up this subject, and in that time, we have had the American remake "Grace point," and a 2nd season of "Broad church." Both of which, I may get around to seeing, if I can find them on the world wide web, and I have the time, but . . .?! till then some final thoughts on what I started.

"The proof is in the pudding," or in this case, "The proof is in the writing."

Some people who have seen the 2nd season of "Broad church," thought it was so bad, that they have no interest in even trying to see the 3rd season, which is planned. I could have told them that, as it takes an extraordinary writer to (see Anne Perry) write a 1st season police procedural, and a 2nd season courtroom drama, as they are so different, and from seeing how badly the 1st season was written (see previous posts) it would be a forethought that the 2nd season would be as bad, or even worst, as some people think.

Not only does the 1st season include the death of a child, but so does the 2nd season, with "even less reason," then the 1st season, or some people have posted, who have seen the 2nd season.

"Even less reason" or not, there is just something odd about the writer's attitude to children, at least in the 1st season, that I find disturbing.

When people talk about the 1st season, they talk about the acting, the directing, but they seldom if ever talk about the writing.

Even though good writing is the foundation upon which a good story is based, and the writing, at least in the 1st season, was (IMHO) far from good.

Next time: Tabula Rasa.

Logged
BoyScoutKevin
Frightening Fanatic of Horrible Cinema
****

Karma: 217
Posts: 4088


« Reply #62 on: April 02, 2015, 02:40:36 PM »

Why . . .?! Only now complaints about the bad writing found in the 2nd season of the show. When the writing, more or less, has always been bad, even in the 1st season. Where . . ?! Without reason, the boys' behaviors are unbelievable, the citizens are played as being stupid, and the cops are played as being incompetent. And that is only 3 reasons. There are other things, such as the psychic character, that add nothing to the story, that are indications of bad writing.

What "Broad church" is good as, is as a standard, and it might be a low standard, but . . .?! as a standard to measure other writings. For example: Ruth Downie's "Tabula Rasa." Where . . .

When a rumor causes a boy to disappear, the heroine goes to the boy's mother, who says: "You don't know what it is to lose a child, as you have no children of your own."--"No, but as a woman, I understand how you feel as a woman, and that is why I am going to do everything I can to find your son, and I'm going to get my husband, and I'll see that he does everything he can to find your son."

The operative word here is "everything." These characters and others are doing everything they can to find the missing boy. Unlike in "Broad church," where the boy is not missing, but dead, but . . .?! the characters are not doing everything they can do to find the boy's murderer. Indeed, they even seem strongly blasť about the boy's murder.

That's 1 up for "Tabula Rasa."

And while our heroine is riding all over God's green earth, getting saddle sores, to find the source of the rumor that caused the boy to go missing, for if she finds that source, she might find what happened to the boy. Her husband, our hero, is visiting every brothel in town, one of whose owners says: "No. We don't have any boys here. There is no demand for them. You might try the next town over."

And when our hero finally catches up with the missing boy and his new owner, who says: "Do you like boys? I saw you looking at the boy. If you like boys, then maybe we can make a deal."

The writer does not approve of such. She does not like such, but . . .?! She does have the courage, or whatever it takes, to admit that . . ."Yes. There are sexual predators who prey on children--both boys and girls."

Unlike the writer of "Broad church" who refuses to admit, at least in the 1st season, for whatever reason, that there are such predators out there, as there was in the series, and to compound that refusal, he makes up excuses for the predator's behavior.

That's 2 up for "Tabula Rasa"

As for the boys themselves . . .

In "Tabula Rasa," to protect the family farm from strangers, including our hero, the boy, before he goes missing, to look fierce, holds up a axe, half his size, but . . . ?
He gives it away, when with one hand, he reaches up to brush the hair out of his eyes. And he totally gives it away, when he gives out a gap-toothed grin, at the situation.

That is boyish behavior. That shows that the writer understands how boys behave. Maybe, because she has boys of her own.

Unlike in "Broad church," one boy destroys his computer to destroy the messages sent and received from the victim, and in a public place, where he can be seen destroying his computer. And what is more, just after he took a class in computer science, in which he did very well. Which class would probably point out that his I.P. would have a list of the messages sent and received from the destroyed computer

And the boy who is the victim does not fight back, when he is being strangled, even when he would instinctively fight back somehow. He would not even need to think about it.

That is not boyish behavior for either boy. That just shows that the writer does not understand how boys behave.

And that is 3 up for "Tabula Rasa."

And that is 3 up and 1 down and over, as we have finally come to the end of this thread. And if you enjoyed it, then please join me at another thread on this board "Aaron and Bianchi's 'Thanos Rising' Dissected, as we discuss whether Thanos will ever get his own film.
Logged
BoyScoutKevin
Frightening Fanatic of Horrible Cinema
****

Karma: 217
Posts: 4088


« Reply #63 on: October 02, 2015, 04:49:28 PM »

The writing in "Broad church" may not be good for much, but . . .?! It is good as a standard. Maybe not a particularly high standard, but . . .?! a standard nevertheless.  Thus, how does Chris Chibnall's writing in that compare to Mark Billingham's "Time of Death." The similiarities of which we'll get to as we continue.

More realistic. More credible. More believable.

1. The wife and children of the suspect.
Chibnall: No
Billingham: Yes
Thus, they are more sympathetic characters with Billingham.

2. Killer
Chibnall: No
Billingham: Yes
Smarter. More worrisome. More loathsome. More fearsome. Thus, a better villain with Billingham.

3. Earlier history of sexual abuse in story of hero.
Chibnall: No
Billingham: Yes
Thus, one of the heroes has a greater personal stake in the case with Billingham.

4. Language
Chibnall: No
Billingham: Yes.
More profanity with Billingham, which is truer to the way people actually talk.

Thus, so far . . .
Billingham: 4
Chibnall: 0
Next time: failure to understand
Logged
BoyScoutKevin
Frightening Fanatic of Horrible Cinema
****

Karma: 217
Posts: 4088


« Reply #64 on: October 11, 2015, 01:50:06 PM »

Failure to understand

01. Seize all electronic devices in a timely manner.
Billingham: Not only do the police seize the suspect's cellphone and computer, they also seize the computers and cellphones of the suspect's children.
Chibnall: the dead victim had a cellphone. The cellphone is missing. At no time are we told that the police made any effort to find the cellphone. The police only obtain the missing cellphone, when it is accidentally found by someone, who then turns it into the police.

02. The importance of trace (forensic) evidence.
Billingham: Not only do the police seize the  clothes the suspect was wearing the day the victim disappear, they seize all his clothes. They seize the suspect's vehicle in which one victim was seen. Not only to search the vehicle, but . . .?! to take the vehicle apart piece by piece. Looking for that once trace that would tie the suspect to another victim.
Chibnall: at no time do we learn that the police made any effort to seize either the clothes or the vehicle of any of the suspects to look for trace (forensic) evidence of the victim.

03. Children's behavior
Billingham: the victim is restrained, but . . .?! when she thinks she is about to be killed, she screams, she kicks, she fights back. One does not even have to think about it. It is instinctive.
Chibnall: the victim is not restrained, but . . .?! when he thinks he is about to be killed, he does not scream, he does not kick, he does not fight back. That is not instinctive. That is a lack of understanding of how children behave.

04. One does what ever one needs to go to find a murderer.
Billingham: normally, every suspect within a certain age range and range of location, would have a DNA sample taken, with that DNA sample compared to the DNA found on the dead victim. Except . . .?! There is no DNA evidence on the victim this time, the reason which we'll get to later, thus all this would be an exercise in futility.
Chibnall: But . . .?! This time there is a DNA sample. The DNA left on the cigarettes smoked and left in the vicinity of the victim's body. Yet . . .?! One is never told that the police make any effort to obtain a DNA sample from any of the suspects in the murder.

Chibnall: 0
Billingham: 4 more

Next time: Incompetent and Stupid
Logged
BoyScoutKevin
Frightening Fanatic of Horrible Cinema
****

Karma: 217
Posts: 4088


« Reply #65 on: October 25, 2015, 03:06:41 PM »

Incompetent and Stupid

I think previously I had pointed out at least 2 dozen ways the police proved their incompetency in Chibnall. Which is far more than anything else I have come across that involved the police in a fictional story. Yet, there are some that I knew I missed. One being the incompetence of the family liaison officer in Chibnall's story, which I did not recognize till I read Billingham's story. Chibnall's incompetent. Billingham's competent. The difference is as clear as night and day.

The SOCO team in Chibnall always comes across as being less competent than the one in Billingham. In Billingham, we have a scene in which the SOCO team is sifting the dirt in which a body was found, trying to do everything they competently can do to connect the murderer with his murder victim. Nothing like that scene exists in Chibnall.

Stupid

I knew it was stupid when one of the characters in Chibnall says: "No one will want to come here [after a murder has occurred.]" I just did not realize how stupid it was till Billingham. Not only do you have the police from outside coming to help in the investigation, but . . .?! you have the national press, both print and broadcast, coming to town to cover the story, and you have, with less reason, a large group of ghoulish public come to town, staking out the suspect's house, the victim's house, the house of a surprise alibi witness, and no doubt staking out where the body was found, and the murder occurred.

No one in Chibnall seems to be smart enough to question the use of how the police are using their manpower, especially, in the beginning of the case, when it is most likely that the murderer will be found. "Shouldn't the police be here looking for the murderer, instead of over there, doing something else?" Some one in Billingham is smart enough to ask that question: "Shouldn't the police be here looking for the missing victims, instead of over there, doing something else?"

Burning of evidence to destroy evidence. Twice stupid in Chibnall. Not only does it not work, but . . .?! Oddly enough, or, maybe not, one of the most feared things at sea is fire. Thus, when the murderer sets fire to the boat, which was used to transport the victim, there'll be reports coming in from all over from people who see the fire at sea. Thus, drawing more attention to the evidence rather than less, if the boat had just been sunk at sea.

But . . .?! Twice smart in Billingham. Not only does it destroy the DNA evidence on the victim's body, but . . .?! It opens up the body to greater insect depredation, and as the time of the murder is being determined by the amount of insects on the body, the fire distorts the timeline.

Keeping of a drug stash.

Stupid in Chibnall, but . . .?! A character in Billingham also keeps their drug stash, instead of destroying it. It might be the difference between a large amount of cocaine, and a small amount of weed, but . . .?! since it also occurs in Billingham, we'll give something to Chibnall for his character's stupidity.

Billingham: 5 more
Chibnall: 1

Next time: better and bolder
Logged
BoyScoutKevin
Frightening Fanatic of Horrible Cinema
****

Karma: 217
Posts: 4088


« Reply #66 on: November 01, 2015, 02:31:28 PM »

Bolder and Better

Bolder

Cheating
Chibnall: one of the suspects cheats on his wife with an adult woman.

Billingham: one of the suspects cheats on his wife with a teenage girl, who is barely above the age of consent.

To Billingham

Sexual molestation of children
Chibnall: makes excuses for molester and dances around the subject.

Billingham: makes no excuses for molester and faces the subject squarely.

To Billingham

Better

Wrong suspect
Billingham: while initially the police have the wrong suspect in custody, there are strong clues as to why they suspect the wrong suspect.

Chibnall: even though there are strong reasons not to suspect several of the wrong suspects (physical size, past behavior, etc.) the police continue to pursue the wrong suspect at the expense of pursuing the right suspect.

To Billingham

Right suspect
Billingham: Strong reasons to finally suspect right suspect in case.

Chibnall: suspect comes out of nowhere. No reason to suspect right suspect, or reasons are so weak, as to be nearly extant.

To Billingham

Billingham 4
Chibnall 0
Logged
BoyScoutKevin
Frightening Fanatic of Horrible Cinema
****

Karma: 217
Posts: 4088


« Reply #67 on: November 08, 2015, 02:45:45 PM »

"A picture is worth a thousand words."

That is why a film or TV show is often better than a book, because one scene in a film or TV show can show what it takes a thousand words in a book to describe.

On the other hand . . .

Sometimes a book is better for something than a film or TV, such as, getting into the mind of the villain, whoever he or she may be, without giving it away. Which is what Billingham does, gets into the mind of the villain, and Chibnall does not. Yet . . .?! We'll give this one to Chibnall, for the reason stated.

Chibnall 1

On the other hand . . .

Billingham also gets into the mind of the victim, which Chibnall also does not do, which he should/could. Thus, we'll give this one to Billingham.

Billingham 1
Chibnall 1

Next time: miscellaneous comparisons and then final thoughts.
Logged
BoyScoutKevin
Frightening Fanatic of Horrible Cinema
****

Karma: 217
Posts: 4088


« Reply #68 on: November 19, 2015, 04:35:27 PM »

Miscellaneous

Both feature an older girl and an younger boy.
Chibnall: acquaintances, but not brother and sister.
Billingham: brother and sister. Thus, they play off of each other better than if they had been mere acquaintances.

Suspense
Chibnall: failure to generate any suspense at the end.
Billingham: at the end, the villain is on the way to kill the only witness left to the crimes committed. Can our heroes get there first and stop the villain? Generates suspense at the end.

Higher sense of morality
Chibnall: suspect has sex with underage girl. Goes to prison for crime. Comes back. Marries girl. All is fine.
Billingham: suspect waits for underage girl to be of age, ere he has sex with her. All is fine. NOT! Of age or not, an adult male does not have sex with a teenage girl, whether she is of age to consent or not. Thus, Billingham operates with a higher sense of morality.

Chibnall : 0
Billingham: 3

Next time: final thoughts
Logged
BoyScoutKevin
Frightening Fanatic of Horrible Cinema
****

Karma: 217
Posts: 4088


« Reply #69 on: December 02, 2015, 05:18:21 PM »

While, what we have here is 2 different types of stories, Billingham's novel, and Chibnall's limited TV series, the foundation of any good film or TV program is a good story. Thus, when a story is . . .

1. unrealistic
2. non-credible
3. unbelievable
4. lacks understanding
5. lacks suspense
6. lacks boldness
7. has incompetent police
8. and stupid characters

And while we each have our own level, a story that is not good, takes us out of the story.

On the other hand, as story that is good, that is or has . . .

1. realistic
2. credible
3. believable
4. understanding
5. suspenseful
6. bold
7. competent police
8. and smart characters.

Keeps us within the story.

Thus, while not all the reasons need to be given to prove that Billingham is a better writer, writing a better story, than Chibnall. It is the accumulative affect of all these reasons that proves Billingham is the better writer, with the better story, than Chibnall.

Concluded! . . . For now?
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5]
Badmovies.org Forum  |  Other Topics  |  Television  |  Broadchurch: the American Remix Version « previous next »
    Jump to:  


    RSS Feed Subscribe Subscribe by RSS
    Email Subscribe Subscribe by Email


    Popular Articles
    How To Find A Bad Movie

    The Champions of Justice

    Plan 9 from Outer Space

    Manos, The Hands of Fate

    Podcast: Todd the Convenience Store Clerk

    Faster, Pussycat! Kill! Kill!

    Dragonball: The Magic Begins

    Cool As Ice

    The Educational Archives: Driver's Ed

    Godzilla vs. Monster Zero

    Do you have a zombie plan?

    FROM THE BADMOVIES.ORG ARCHIVES
    ImageThe Giant Claw - Slime drop

    Earth is visited by a GIANT ANTIMATTER SPACE BUZZARD! Gawk at the amazingly bad bird puppet, or chuckle over the silly dialog. This is one of the greatest b-movies ever made.

    Lesson Learned:
    • Osmosis: os∑mo∑sis (oz-mo'sis, os-) n., 1. When a bird eats something.

    Subscribe to Badmovies.org and get updates by email:

    HOME B-Movie Reviews Reader Reviews Forum Interviews TV Shows Advertising Information Sideshows Links Contact

    Badmovies.org is owned and operated by Andrew Borntreger. All original content is © 1998 - 2014 by its respective author(s). Image, video, and audio files are used in accordance with the Fair Use Law, and are property of the film copyright holders. You may freely link to any page (.html or .php) on this website, but reproduction in any other form must be authorized by the copyright holder.